Responses of the Philippines to the Issues Raised by Members

RESPONSES OF THE PHILIPPINES TO THE ISSUES RAISED BY MEMBERS

OF THE COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE DURING THE INTERACTIVE DIALOGUE AND CONSIDERATION OF THE PHILIPPINES’ 3RD PERIODIC REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE (CAT)

Palais Wilson, Geneva, Switzerland

27-28 April 2016

I. INTRODUCTION

In its Opening Statement, the Philippine Delegation assured the Committee that the State is moving forward and determined to prevail despite the challenges in implementing the Convention Against Torture. It also painted a canvass of what the Philippine government has done, and is committed to do, consistent with its human rights obligations.

The Philippine government asserts its steadfastness in protecting the rights and promoting the interests, especially of the most vulnerable sectors in its society.

Some critical principles were emphasized as the Philippines answers the issues raised by the Committee, as follows:

First, the Philippine government is committed to promote, protect, and fulfill human rights. This is not just a cherished tradition, but a norm in Philippine society and the Philippine government is determined to continue its work to mainstream human rights in all its programs and policies. Leave no doubt on how deeply the State values human rights and how willing it is to go the extra mile to ensure that these rights are promoted and protected;

Second, there is no culture of impunity in the Philippines. Policies and laws in place ensure that violators are punished, and mechanisms in operation deter would-be violators;

Third, the Philippine justice system is functional. Its justice system may not be perfect, but definitely it is not dysfunctional, despite alleged deficiencies.

The fact that the Philippines has impeached a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, indicted a former President and three incumbent Senators, and arrested a 2-star General for violation of civil and political rights are proof that the system is working. The Philippine judicial process may be perceived to be time-challenged, but it is not ready to be hasty as to sacrifice the protection of the right to due process of both the alleged victims and perpetrators of crimes.

Fourth, good governance is a centerpiece of the State’s current administration. Good governance is not a mere slogan, but practiced with a tenacity of purpose. And acts of torture contravene this very principle that the State so highly uphold. Declarations to this effect were made by no less than by President Benigno Aquino during the issuance of the Anti-Torture Act's implementing rules and regulations in 2010.

The Philippines also restated that it ratified the Convention Against Torture (CAT) riding on the strong belief that torture has no place in a democratic and civilized society and should be eradicated.

The Philippine delegation came to the revalida fully expecting a constructive dialogue and an opportunity to exchange views with the honorable members of this Committee.

In responding to the issues and questions, the Philippines consolidated similar questions. The responses are presented according to specific themes, as follows: (1) effectiveness of existing mechanisms, (2) institutional programs, policies and procedures, (3) questions on legal norms, (4) impact of awareness-building and trainings, (5) measures to address violations against women and children, (6) efforts of our legislature, (7) the State’s relationship with the independent national human rights institution, and (8) the State’s engagement with non-government and civil society organizations.

Update on the status of specific cases brought to the Philippine delegation’s attention, as well as clarifications on some issues raised, are included in the responses below.

II. RESPONSES BY THEMATIC AREAS

A. EFFECTIVENESS OF MECHANISMS

On separate requests from Ms. Malla and Gaer, and Mr. Touze, Bruni, and Zhang for a brief description of the mandate and functions of the State’s inter-agency committee to address extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearance, torture, and other violations to the right to life, liberty, and security, including a response to questions on the Committee’s independence and neutrality, updates on the progress of its work, and capacity-building efforts.

RESPONSE (delivered by Undersecretary Wendell Go, Department of Justice)

1. Administrative Order (AO) No. 35, Series of 2012, issued by President Benigno S. Aquino III provided for the creation of a high level inter-agency committee (IAC), chaired by the Secretary of Justice for the resolution of cases of extra-judicial killings (EJK), enforced disappearances (ED), torture, and other grave violations of the right to life, liberty and security of persons. The Ombudsman and the Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines (CHRP) participate as independent observers of the Committee.

2. The AO 35 mechanism complements and enhances the regular conduct of operations and functions of government agencies. It does add another layer to the bureaucratic processes or regulations, or hamper the operations and functions of individual agencies. On the contrary, it aims to build on the strengths of the different agencies, foster synergies and collaboration among the security forces, academe and non-governmental organizations. The Department of Justice (DOJ), which chairs the IAC, together with other government offices, is committed to the establishment of an institutional legacy of an efficient, coherent, and comprehensive government machinery dedicated to the resolution of unsolved cases of political violence in the form of EJKs, EDs, torture, and other grave violations of the right to life, liberty, and security of persons.

3. The IAC, supported by its technical working group (TWG) and Secretariat, conducted an inventory of unresolved cases, adding new cases referred by government and non-government entities. But over the past years, the role of the IAC has evolved into a mechanism not just for the inventory and monitoring of cases, but for the identification of patterns of impunity, vulnerabilities and areas for improvement, leading to important policy changes.

4. As of date, the IAC TWG has processed 138 reports of EDs, of which 27 were approved by the IAC for inclusion in the Committee’s database.

5. Furthermore, 113 reported incidents of torture are now in various stages of investigation and trial, as follows: 18 pending in court; 24 pending police investigation; 51 terminated; 16 unsolved; and four under police investigation.

6. In the general conduct of investigation for offenses, prosecutors do not participate in case build-up. However, recognizing the sense of urgency in resolving cases of extra-judicial killings, enforced disappearances and torture, composite teams of prosecutors and investigators known as Special Investigation Teams (SITs), Special Oversight Team (SOTs) and Special Tracker Teams (STTs) were created. The composite-team approach is a strategy adopted by the IAC to allow prosecutors and investigators to collaborate, cooperate and coordinate in the investigation and build-up of cases.

7. As of March 31, 2016, 389 prosecutors were designated to handle AO 35 cases, while 68 Special Investigation Teams were created.

8. Investigators and prosecutors who are part of the AO 35 IAC have undergone a series of 3-day orientation-workshops consisting of 11 modules on collaborative case-handling. These workshops are focused on strengthening the linkage between prosecutors and investigators as well as on improving legal and forensics capabilities.

9. In terms of capacity-building, 266 prosecutors from the DOJ and investigators from the Philippine National Police (PNP) and National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) have been trained all over the Philippines, beginning with areas wherein incidents of EJKs, EDs and torture are the highest.

10. As part of its stakeholder engagement program, the DOJ, through the AO 35 IAC, is finalizing the Memorandum of Agreement with the National Monitoring Mechanism (NMM), a tripartite body that that brought together government agencies, non-government organizations and civil society organizations (NGO-CSO), and the independent national human rights institution (NHRI), i.e., the CHRP, in a credible and inclusive forum for monitoring the nation’s progress on the resolution of human rights violations cases, prioritizing EJKs, EDs, and torture in the immediate.

11. Collaborative efforts on the development of information and education materials have likewise been undertaken with the NMM as the latter engages communities, facilitates reporting of cases, and provides support to victims and their families with the end in view of securing the cooperation of witnesses toward successful case resolution.

On the issue of whether there has been any conviction under the Anti-Torture Act of the Philippines

RESPONSE (delivered by Undersecretary Wendell Go, Department of Justice)

12. On 31 March 2016, the Philippine Anti-Torture Act was directly applied in a case involving police torture, wherein the Court found concerned police personnel guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

On the current work of the Inter-Agency Committee on Trafficking in Persons, and extradition policy of the Philippine government in relation to what has been asked by the Committee on the status of asylum seekers

RESPONSE (delivered by Chief State Counsel Ricardo Paras, Department of Justice)

13. Under Section 15 of the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act, or Republic Act No. 9208, as amended, the government shall establish preventive, protective and rehabilitative programs for trafficked persons. The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) under the said provision of the law is mandated to extend its resources and facilities overseas for trafficked persons regardless of their manner of entry into the receiving country and to explore means to further enhance its assistance in eliminating trafficking activities through closer networking with government agencies in the country and overseas, particularly in the formulation of policies and implementation of relevant programs.

14. The DFA provides Filipino victims of trafficking overseas with free legal assistance and counsel to pursue legal action against their traffickers, represent their interests in any criminal investigation or prosecution, and assist in the application for social benefits and/or securing regular immigration status as may be allowed or provided for by the host country. The DFA is also mandated to repatriate trafficked Filipinos, subject to their consent.

15. The DFA is also mandated to take necessary measures for the efficient implementation of the Electronic Passporting System to protect the integrity of Philippine passports, visas and other travel documents to reduce the incidence of trafficking due to fraudulent identification documents. The Philippines started the use of electronic passports in 2012.

16. In coordination with the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), the DFA provides free temporary shelters and other services to Filipino victims of trafficking overseas through the migrant workers and other overseas Filipinos resource center, established under Migrant Workers Act (RA 8042), as amended.

17. In the meantime, the DOJ, as the central authority in the implementation of Extradition Treaties, provides Letters of Assurance issued by the Secretary (Minister) of Justice, as the highest legal officer of the land. These letters assure that extraditees shall not be subjected to torture, as the State adheres to the principles and standards of the absolute condemnation and prohibition of torture, and values the dignity of every human person and guarantees respect of human rights.

18. In a particular case of extradition of one Hedelito Trinidad who was accused in the Philippines of kidnapping-for-ransom and ordered extradited from the US, the extraditee alleged before the US courts that he shall be subjected to torture. The US Secretary of State however weighed in favor of the assurance made by the Secretary of Justice.

19. The Philippines is the first Asian country to accede to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. It is the only country in Asia which has its own Refugee and Statelessness determination and protection mechanism implemented by the DOJ’s Refugees and Stateless Persons Protection Unit. The Refugee Convention defines a refugee as a person, who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or owing to such fear is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of his/her past country or his/her former habitual residence.

20. From 1998-2012, there were 389 asylum applications, with 147 applicants approved. Other applications were either archived or abandoned due to the applicants’ choice to travel to other countries. The refugee determination procedure provides that the Secretary (Minister) of Justice orders the release of asylum seekers from detention where an application is duly filed. Should the application for asylum be denied, the applicant shall be subjected to Philippine Immigration laws where the applicant’s rights to due process and other rights are duly protected.

21. The Philippines respects the principle of non-refoulement, which forbids the return of the asylum seekers to the country where they are the subject of persecution. The Philippine Anti-Torture Law as well as the Anti-Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance Act of 1992 likewise contain provisions on non-refoulement.

B. INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAMS, POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

22. On the issue raised by Ms. Malla that there exists several investigation mechanisms that tend to confuse people. The Philippines asserts that in reality, there is no such confusion. These mechanisms are established for specific purposes and with clearly defined scopes of function.

On the alleged issues relating to the rehabilitation mechanism for victims under the anti-torture law, as raised by Ms. Malla and Mr. Bruni and on the alleged lack of access by torture victims to medical services, on the treatment of medical and psychological reports as public documents, monetary compensation for torture victims, ensuring the integrity of investigations, lack of medical treatment, and problems of entry of medical doctors in prison, including the protection of medical doctors, the last issue having been raised by the Chair.

CONSOLIDATED RESPONSES (Delivered by Dr. Maria Corazon Lucia V. Teoxon, Focal Person for NPM and Torture, Department of Health)

23. On the matter of rehabilitation mechanism for victims. In 2014, the tripartite agreement on the “Comprehensive Rehabilitation Program for Torture Victims and their Families, and Those Who Committed Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment” was signed by the Secretary (Minister) of the Department of Social Welfare & Development (DSWD), Secretary (Minister) of the Department of Health (DOH), and by the CHRP Chairperson.

24. After the first year of implementation, it was realized that a systems analysis of the processes to effectively refer and follow through the services provided to torture victims was necessary. In partnership with another non-governmental organization (NGO), the Balay Rehabilitation, Inc., it was determined that existing health and social service procedures needed to be enhanced in order to accommodate the privacy and security needs of the probable victims of torture and that the participation of community-based NGO-CSOs could better facilitate the inter-agency referral process. The establishment of new hospital service units for probable victims of torture will be initiated as soon as the new protocols and process flows are approved for implementation by the DOH